Monthly Archives

Syndicate

Monday, June 17, 2013

SARATOGA SPRINGS, NY, June 17, 2013—Unfortunately--and not for the reasons you might surmise out of hand—the battle between various segments of the racing industry and the racing media in all its forms is alive and well.

The newspaper business is in as much trouble as the racing industry these days, but if racing doesn’t think it needs media coverage, pro or con, it is sadly mistaken: Any business that does not court media; traditional or otherwise, cannot expect to survive, much less prosper:

ITEM: New York Post Fires Racing Staff on Belmont Stakes Eve

It is no secret that the racing industry—and sports leagues to some extent—no longer believes it’s necessary to at least co-exist with mainstream media of which Internet coverage is now part.

The word blogger, whatever the industry, has become a curse. Yes, many bloggers do not feel it necessary to fact-check before writing. Indeed, shooting from the editorial hip can be highly counter-productive and in some cases patently wrong.

But there are two realities about this that needs acknowledging: First, the information explosion created by 24-hour cable news and the Internet has kept the populace informed as never before. How much it cares beyond the state of Kanye and Kim’s newborn child is another matter.

Secondly, and of greater significance, is that all organizations have become proficient in obfuscation and the spreading of disinformation. Resultantly, honest research doesn’t always unearth the real story, although that’s no reason to stop trying.

The good and bad news about social media is that everyone has an opinion, but it is up to traditional and new media sources to supply opinion that yields perspective. If the population truly cares about the subject at hand, it will Google all about it.

Soon after a New York Post story critical of the New York Racing Association was published during the 2012 Saratoga race meet, the company pulled all its advertising.

That is NYRA’s right, of course. But given that the Post was a mainstream daily that extensively covered horse racing in its market, was it in the association’s best interests to do so?

Apparently it thought it was and that the publishing of daily entries, reporting, commentary and handicapping be damned. Never mind that the Post was the most recognizable source of horse racing coverage in the media capital of the world.

Deserved or not, NYRA always has had a reputation for arrogance: The belief that the Post needed them more than they needed daily coverage of racing would seem to support that notion.

Ironically, there was some meeting of the minds between representatives of both organizations with respect to the lost advertising revenue; no matter.

Once News Corp. decided to place its properties in different pockets of the same pants to please the marketplace or make the Post more attractive to sell, it cut costs and pulled the plug.

The fact that the Post pulled its coverage on Belmont eve obviously was intended to send a message. Mission accomplished; everyone noticed and horse racing took another hit, this one in America’s biggest market.

ITEM: Twitter Wars; Industry Organizations Circle Wagons

In case you missed this recent item, there is a war of words in the Twittersphere between Bob Baffert and Ray Paulick, gentlemen who need no introduction to this audience. The issue was seven mysterious deaths of horses from Baffert’s barn within an 18-month period.

The problem started when Paulick referenced the seven deaths in the wake of the quarter-horse death of the Ruidoso Futurity winner.* It escalated after 2012 Haskell Stakes winner Paynter made a miraculous recovery then underscored his return to health with an impressive victory. In a post-race TVG interview, Baffert gratuitously remarked: “Ray Paulick, if you’re watching, put this is your pipe and smoke it.”

The phrase is a well-known cliché, of course, but not to anyone inside the business who perceived the comment to be nothing less than a pointed jibe meant to discredit the messenger.

Regrettably, Baffert’s fit of pique does not appear to be spontaneous but rather part of an anti-media campaign forged by Baffert and family against anyone who raises questions about the Hall of Famer’s training practices.

Baffert’s wife Jill has been her husband’s staunchest public defender dating back to the misunderstanding that surfaced at Del Mar surrounding the sale of Richard’s Kid, a dual Pacific Classic winner formerly trained by Baffert.

This latest dust-up was a war of words between Jill Baffert and Paulick that followed the "Ruidoso death" comment.

There also was a circulated e-mail from Baffert to industry insiders re: horseplayer advocate Andy Asaro who has had problems with Baffert since the trainer’s owner, Mike Pegram, president of the Thoroughbred Owners of California, lobbied for a parimutuel takeout increase.

Baffert used a similar tack to smear Asaro, referring to him as “bankrupt.” Asaro has demanded an apology which, at this writing, was not forthcoming. Today, Asaro learned that "apparently someone has asked Attorney Ryan Enderle to look into my past, beyond 10 years ago, and is threatening to post a past Bankruptcy of mine online unless I back off."

On the same day the Post fired its racing writers, I received a call from a Baffert associate defending the trainer and questioning my role as executive editor for allowing former jockey agent Harry Hacek to occasionally post commentary at HRI under the “Backside View” flag, some very critical of Baffert. The contact asked if I would speak with Bob. I agreed.

We had a respectful conversation in which we disagreed about his handling of the horse death situation. Baffert’s tone changed somewhat when he discussed the credibility of both Hacek and Asaro. I offered Baffert equal time and confirmed our conversation with this follow-up e-mail:

“Bob,

It was good that we had a talk on the phone this afternoon.

To reiterate, you will have equal time to say whatever you wish, without editing that would alter context in any way.

I will write a precede (cq) that introduces the issue to readers who might be unfamiliar with the subject matter.

Your story will lead HRI for a two-day period and, of course, will live forever in the archives. Take your time with it.

I will e-mail you to advise when the story will run and, of course, if I have any questions.

May all your horses have a safe trip tomorrow and every day.

John Pricci, executive editor
HorseRaceInsider.com”

I have not yet received Baffert’s retort and sincerely hope that I will. What seems obvious—my conversation notwithstanding—is that there has been a campaign waged by Baffert’s supporters against racing media or anyone taking a differing view. That is their right, of course.

But for TVG--which promised to give Paulick equal time to react to Baffert’s remark--to rescind its invitation due to a “scheduling conflict” appears little more than another industry media organization favoring the game’s powerful practitioners rather than report on the story or provide a serious, fair-minded editorial is embarrassingly inexcusable.

* correction made to clarify original source reference, made at 6:12 p.m., 061713

Looks like I’m under attack from someone who doesn’t like me because of my criticism of certain people. So far today I’ve gotten a crazy email and tow spoofed phone calls. I won’t get into the details of this one because my phone provider is doing an investigation. It does have something to do with an Official Organization related to Horse Racing in California and an individual who has a position in the industry in California.

Andy, keep up the good fight, they just want people to roll over, not ask questions and be yes men, i applaud you for fighting for what’s right. Normally, when people can’t discredit the message, they try and discredit the messenger, i would suggest to people to not get distracted by shots at the messenger and please listen to the message.

Fwiw, to be fair to Baffert, i believe the official quote was “Paynter says put that in your pipe and smoke it”.

So, he was actually quoting the horse and just relaying the horse’s quote to the masses.

Baffert is such an amazing trainer that not only can he get horses to run incredibly fast, not only can he get them to rebreak nearing the wire, but he can get them to talk and speak english!. Truly a horse whisperer if you ask me! One of a kind for sure, Grizzly Adams has nothing on Bob!

Must say that having heard and read extensively about these horse dearhs, it seems to me that there is no proof being provided of any wrong doing by Mr. Baffert. Can we condemn this man without any evidence. I undwrstand; 7 horses are dead, and it certainly warrants an investigation, but judgment should be reserved, and unless and until hard evidence of nefarious activvities comes to light, we must give Mr. Baffert the benefit of the doubt. No, I have no agenda, and am not in anybody’s camp on this matter.

He lives! Once again we hear from OTM Al apologizing for the industry.

BTW Al, everyone makes mistakes and my relationship with Paulick has been repaired, just like my credit. Have the smart guys on PA taken on Baffert and his pipe comments the same way they did with me? LOL

I don’t think hypocracy means having a different point of view. You might want to look that up. It’s nice to see you haven’t changed a bit either. I’m hoping Mr. Paulick is wise enough to see that as well.

I agree that it is troubling. I believe an inquiry should have been made. I do not believe in making allegations without having facts brought to light from such an inquiry. I also believe saying the things about your past was just as vile as what you did. It has nothing to do with the issue at hand, just like when you did it. Thus the irony.

I don’t feel one bit embarrassed and frankly you hadn’t entered my mind until I saw the article. The subject of the article by the way was about making attacks on people’s past that had nothing to do with the subject at hand. Something you not only did, but then bragged about. If I was vindictive, I would say you got what you deserved, but I don’t feel that way. What you did was wrong and so was this. Forgiveness however requires more than just asking for it. Maybe Mr. Paulick has truly forgiven you. Good for him. I’ve seen nothing from you to merit it. The irony of the situation is compelling though. I wonder if Mr. Pricci knew when he wrote this. Perhaps he can answer.

The timing of what happened at the Post was unfortunate, but I feel had more to do with legal reasons that had nothing to do with it being the eve of The Belmont Stakes. Ruppert Murdoch filed for divorce from his wife in the days after The Belmont, and it may have been that had to be official BEFORE he filed for divorce, which became official last Thursday (June 13) I believe. It’s unfortunate about the timing, but there may have been other factors at work that forced those changes as part of a much bigger round of cuts at The Post.

Hey Walt, whatever the reason--and I was unaware of Mr. Murdoch’s personal issues--either one makes sense as to the timing. My argument was more concerned with how the Post treated its loyal racing readers by not providing coverage of the Triple Crown’s third leg in their own backyard.

Al, I have no wish to comment on the personal Andy/Ray/Al troika. This was a piece about how there is a movement to, if not silence the media, intimidate it into feeling privileged they are credentialed to cover the sport.

I have my opinion about the horse deaths but as TTT suggests, without proof speculation is all there is. The subject is too volatile to offer an opinion without knowledge of what really happened.

For me, seven “accidental deaths” in 18 months is hard to reconcile as being coincidental.

Also, it’s curious how muddled this picture has been since the story broke: inconsistencies vis a vis post-mortem findings; how Dr. Rick Arthur walked back his original remarks on the initial findings, and how a CHRB representative Ms. Derek proactively offered a defense/explanation of events re: Mr. Baffert’s horses.

Anyone who loves the game and/or bets the money needs to know all the facts, no matter how painful the findings may be. Only then can anyone render an honest judgment. Sadly, I won’t be holding me breath on this.

Finally, I just wish that the racing media would do its job and stay on this case. The subject matter is too important. But, alas, conflicts abound.

I am not big into Thoroughbred racing but have been watching and getting into it more lately. What is going on lately regarding this high profile trainer is turning into somewhat of a ‘dog and pony show’ pun intended.
I was aware of the situation prior to watching Paynter’s race and was very excited to see the iron tough horse’s performance. After the race however, I found Mr Baffert’s comment regarding Mr Paulick very immature and uncalled for. It took away from Paynter’s remarkable comeback considering the medical issues he has endured. Kudos to his owners and the medical team who worked so hard to save his life.
I would also like to point out that seven horse deaths in a 16 month period in the care of ANY trainer (or person for that matter) is not just an anomaly but is something that should be (and I hope is) investigated to the greatest degree and the results when established to be made public. The cause of these deaths need to be found and proper actions to avoid further deaths taken.
Why am I saying this you ask? I am not making accusations or pointing fingers however, I am saying that this is NOT normal. I have trained and know trainers and know of none who have had seven sudden deaths in 10 years let alone 16 months like this case. I am a Veterinary Technologist and former SPCA Investigative Agent. Whatever racing commission this ongoing (hopefully) case falls under, I hope they find the cause soon. For the horse’s sake.

If a healthcare professional like a dentist or a doctor had multiple patients die under mysterious circumstances, would that healthcare pro be seen in public receiving hugs, back pats and congrats for one high profile patient who was close to death but didnt actually die?

Paulick is rather thin skinned. Avoid criticizing him. Baffert makes one off hand remark for all this ruckus.

Note to RCI: Amend model rules as follows:
1. Every catastrophic horse death results in immediate probation for trainer involved pending investigation, and followed by suspension if negligence is found.

This will end 75% of the problem of horse deaths. The other 25% is likely unpreventable.

*** HorseRaceInsider will delete any comment that engages in personal attacks directed at anyone, uses foul language, or one made by an imposter using another’s name to express an opinion or comment.

HRI will not, however, edit or discourage those who, with intellectual honesty, disagree with HRI staffers or other readers. We also will not, as is done on some racing sites, edit disagreeable or negative commentary in the interests of commerce.